Please Support Our Sponsors


Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 27
  1. #1
    Senior Member NotreDameNate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Southern Illinois
    Posts
    3,329

    Targeting!!!!!!!


    Register to remove this advertisement
    What the fuck has happened to FOOTBALL!!! I am OUTRAGED that Tuitt got kicked!!! So so so so fucking stupid. The QB was leading with his head, what the flying fuck!!!!!!!!!!! Furious!!!!
    KeiVarae Russell: "When the coaches told me over the next few days in the film room that I was gonna start I was like Uh Oh.

  2. #2
    Community Moderator mlcspinner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    St. Johnsbury Vt.
    Posts
    18,605
    Very bad call


    IRISH GUARD-GH Division

  3. #3
    Senior Member Boston Boxer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edwards AFB California
    Posts
    304
    terrible

  4. #4
    Senior Member NotreDameNate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Southern Illinois
    Posts
    3,329
    Honestly I would be upset if a Pitt player got kicked for the same call. Obviously not as much, but on certain levels I hate this rule.
    KeiVarae Russell: "When the coaches told me over the next few days in the film room that I was gonna start I was like Uh Oh.

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Boca Raton, Florida
    Posts
    1,385
    Technically, Pitt player did go out of the game because of targeting when that Pitt player came flying in for a tackle, lowered his helmet and did not look where he was going. The difference was he hit his own player and knocked him out of the game. Tuitt got robbed. It was also close to the first down marker. How are you supposed to stop him from getting a first down if you vcan't tackle the guy?

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    5,220
    I don't understand the rule at all. It states the player will be ejected for targeting a "defenseless" player. An example would be a receiver going up to make a catch or a QB in a passing position (like Tommy vs. USC). I don't see how a ball carrier running up the field could possibly be considered defenseless, but that has been the situation both times it has been called against ND the last two weeks (though one was waived off).

    If the QB takes off running, he is a ball Carrier and loses any right to special protection. If the ball carrier dives head-first, he similarly loses any right to special protection outside of dirty shot like taking a shot while he's already down like what happened to Holson last year against Stanford. Oh, and while we're at it, it isn't a late hit out of bounds unless you are actually out of bounds or diving perpendicUlar to the sideline. Running upfield two feet away from the sideline (like in the Navy game) doesn't count.

  7. #7
    Senior Member NotreDameNate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Southern Illinois
    Posts
    3,329
    Complete b.s. I'm fine with someone not protecting themselves, I get that. But you are 100% correct about a ball carrier running with his head down. I wonder if that call would have stood if that was a running back and not a qb?
    KeiVarae Russell: "When the coaches told me over the next few days in the film room that I was gonna start I was like Uh Oh.

  8. #8
    Moderator IrishDodger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Bryant, Arkansas
    Posts
    16,986
    Mike Pereira ✔ @MikePereira
    Please don't ask me about the targeting ejection at ND. I despise the rule. An ejection for that?? Part of the tackle in my opinion.
    8:07 PM - 9 Nov 2013

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    10,240
    I don't like the targeting rule either, but then I saw a hit in the Houston v UCF game live that made me realize why they have it. Poor UCF kid when up in the air to catch the ball, Houston player launched himself into his head and knocked him unconscious in mid air. He laid on the ground for 10 minutes.

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Fort Lauderdale, FL
    Posts
    3,493
    Quote Originally Posted by jerseyborn1971 View Post
    I don't like the targeting rule either...
    How about when it comes to a certain Tennessee voyeur ?

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. IrishEyes: Echols targeting ND return ($)
    By Svoboda in forum Notre Dame News & Headlines
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-11-2016, 10:15 AM
  2. Targeting Rule Needs Rethinking
    By Svoboda in forum Notre Dame Blogosphere
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-09-2016, 05:11 AM
  3. IrishIllustrated: Irish targeting UK commit ($)
    By Svoboda in forum Notre Dame News & Headlines
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-04-2015, 04:42 PM
  4. IrishEyes: New schools targeting elite DL ($)
    By Svoboda in forum Notre Dame News & Headlines
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-04-2013, 12:00 PM
  5. BlueandGold: Top Schools Targeting Snodgrass ($)
    By Svoboda in forum Notre Dame News & Headlines
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-09-2013, 02:20 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •